Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 04:28 AM - Re: AGING AIRCRAFT (Barry Collman)
2. 05:45 AM - AGING AIRCRAFT (BobsV35B@aol.com)
3. 05:54 AM - Re: AGING AIRCRAFT (N395V)
4. 06:38 AM - Re: AGING AIRCRAFT (css nico)
5. 07:19 AM - Re: AGING AIRCRAFT (steve2)
6. 08:02 AM - Re: AGING AIRCRAFT (Barry Collman)
7. 08:15 AM - Re: AGING AIRCRAFT (YOURTCFG@aol.com)
8. 08:31 AM - Re: AGING AIRCRAFT (CloudCraft@aol.com)
9. 08:33 AM - Re: AGING AIRCRAFT (CloudCraft@aol.com)
10. 08:37 AM - Re: AGING AIRCRAFT (CloudCraft@aol.com)
11. 08:54 AM - Re: AGING AIRCRAFT (steve2)
12. 09:39 AM - Re: AGING AIRCRAFT (Chris Schuermann)
13. 09:56 AM - Re: Re: AGING AIRCRAFT (John Vormbaum)
14. 10:04 AM - Re: AGING AIRCRAFT (YOURTCFG@aol.com)
15. 10:19 AM - Re: AGING AIRCRAFT (John Vormbaum)
16. 10:20 AM - Re: AGING AIRCRAFT (John Vormbaum)
17. 10:22 AM - Re: AGING AIRCRAFT (Chris Schuermann)
18. 10:26 AM - Re: AGING AIRCRAFT (John Vormbaum)
19. 01:19 PM - Re: AGING AIRCRAFT (W J R HAMILTON)
20. 01:25 PM - Re: AGING AIRCRAFT (Barry Collman)
21. 01:49 PM - Re: AGING AIRCRAFT (Chris Schuermann)
22. 03:57 PM - Re: AGING AIRCRAFT (WINGFLYER1@aol.com)
23. 04:16 PM - Re: AGING AIRCRAFT (css nico)
24. 06:36 PM - Re: AGING AIRCRAFT (YOURTCFG@aol.com)
25. 07:53 PM - Re: AGING AIRCRAFT (css nico)
26. 08:51 PM - Re: AGING AIRCRAFT (John Vormbaum)
27. 09:22 PM - Re: AGING AIRCRAFT (css nico)
28. 09:28 PM - (Jim Addington)
29. 10:57 PM - Re: AGING AIRCRAFT (John Vormbaum)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT |
--> Commander-List message posted by: "Barry Collman" <barry.collman@air-britain.co.uk>
Hi John,
Nope, I'm sorry, but I don't have the parts count for a Commander.
But, if you bring yours to the next Fly-In, we could strip it down and find out!
Maybe 'down-under' Richard has an 'ball-park' figure after his extensive
restoration of a 680E?
Best Regards,
Barry
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Vormbaum" <john@vormbaum.com>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 7:44 AM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
| --> Commander-List message posted by: "John Vormbaum" <john@vormbaum.com>
|
| Nico,
|
| Funny enough, at some point in the near future I'm going to Arizona to take
| a look at a (certified, I think) 350hp turbodiesel that would hang nicely on
| a Commander wing.
|
| There are a few things that make building a "new" Commander extremely
| unlikely:
|
| 1) Twin Commander Corp. owns the tooling & type certificate for the piston
| airplanes and has no interest in supporting them
| 2) From what I've heard, the tooling/jigs for the pistons are very worn out,
| and if new ones were to be built, any mfr. would have to re-tool....at great
| cost.
|
| The real clincher is the parts count in Commanders (Sir Barry, do you have a
| number?). Just the nacelle alone has an extraordinary number of parts if I
| recall correctly. To build a new airplane in an even remotely cost-effective
| method, the airplane would have to be re-engineered. You could probably
| redesign the nacelles and the rest of the fuselage with far fewer parts,
| maybe even mix in some composites, but the man-hours required would still be
| a killer. I don't think there's a way you could build them and sell them at
| a profit for under $1M, which is quite steep for a piston twin (see many new
| 2005 Barons flying around? I bet they only built 20 of them last year). The
| man-hours were such a problem, they even stopped flat-riveting the lower
| fuselages on Shrikes to cut corners. It didn't help keep the line alive.
|
| Even if you could clean-sheet the design, preserving the original
| aerodynamics & appearance, it would still take a HUGE amount of capital to
| build something that wouldn't be too competitive in today's market. For the
| price you'd have to sell them, you could probably step into a turbine
| utility aircraft or even a VLJ.
|
| I personally have a fantasy that some lottery winning aviation fool *will*
| resurrect the design, maybe even the turbines too, with a fair bit of
| composite structure, wet wings instead of bladders, none of the AD's, and
| all modern accoutrements, but I just don't see it happening.
|
| Cheers,
|
| /John
|
| ----- Original Message -----
| From: "css nico" <nico@cybersuperstore.com>
| To: <commander-list@matronics.com>
| Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2006 10:21 PM
| Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
|
|
| > --> Commander-List message posted by: "css nico"
| > <nico@cybersuperstore.com>
| >
| > Interesting comment, John. If one owns the type certification and the
| > tooling, surely if cost is not a factor, one can build new Commanders, or
| > am
| > I missing something. I would opt for a new power plant, of course, perhaps
| > something like a new generation diesel engine.
| >
| > Nico
| >
| >
| > ----- Original Message -----
| > From: "John Vormbaum" <john@vormbaum.com>
| > To: <commander-list@matronics.com>
| > Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2006 9:50 PM
| > Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
| >
| >
| >> --> Commander-List message posted by: "John Vormbaum" <john@vormbaum.com>
| >>
| >> Captain Jimbob,
| >>
| >> I would especially like to see the really high time airframes of the
| >> Commander world championed, like John Towner's 23,000-hr.+ airframe and
| >> my
| >> own 18,000-hr. airframe. I think showing well maintained older, high time
| >> airframes in excellent running condition as evidence of their durability
| >> would go a long way towards setting reasonable standards were the FAA to
| >> implement inspection timeframes.
| >>
| >> I would also like some methods of airframe life extension addressed, like
| >> new spar caps etc. You might want to dig for the Australian CAA document
| >> that, after research, recommended a lifespan for Aero Commander 500B's to
| > be
| >> 35,000 hours, at which time a spar cap replacement is mandated. The
| > document
| >> further states that after spar cap replacement, the airframe would be
| >> good
| >> for another 35,000 hours.
| >>
| >> We have the benefit of flying an airplane that is exceptionally well
| >> built
| >> and designed to be rugged far beyond the limits for which it is approved.
| >> Since building new Commanders is out of the question (regardless of type
| >> certificate ownership, tooling, and cost), we need to be very creative in
| >> ensuring that these airplanes will fly for years to come.
| >>
| >> Good luck,
| >>
| >> /John
| >>
| >> PS: I need about 50 more years out of my airframe (if I decide to quit
| >> flying at 87, that is).
| >>
| >>
| >> ----- Original Message -----
| >> From: <YOURTCFG@aol.com>
| >> To: <commander-list@matronics.com>
| >> Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2006 7:18 PM
| >> Subject: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
| >>
| >>
| >> > --> Commander-List message posted by: YOURTCFG@aol.com
| >> >
| >> > HI KIDS.
| >> >
| >> > Later this month I will be attending the FAA meeting on aging
| >> > aircraft to be held in Kansas City. With me will be Mr. Gary Rankin,
| > the
| >> > pres. of
| >> > the Navion Society. Many other type groups will be represented as
| >> > well
| >> > as
| >> > type certificate holders. The FAA is seeking guidance for proposals
| > that
| >> > will
| >> > effect the long term life of our airframes.
| >> > I am told on good authority that the FAA has no hidden agenda here
| > but
| >> > is sincerely looking for help from the industry regarding this issue.
| >> > The
| >> > recent wing failure of the Chauks Airline Grumman Mallard precipitated
| >> > this
| >> > meeting.
| >> > There are a few sugestions already making there way to the surface.
| >> > One, sponsored by the EAA, would allow all aircraft certificate under
| > the
| >> > old
| >> > CAR-3 standards to "opt out" of the normal category and be placed in a
| >> > new
| >> > category allowing for much more flexibility in the use of parts and
| >> > modifications. Although I have not seen a hard draft of this
| >> > proposal,
| >> > it appears it
| >> > would be similar to the Canadian "owner maintained" category, we shall
| >> > see.
| >> > While I don't see this as a bad proposal, and support the concept, it
| >> > doesn't
| >> > seem to address the FAAs real concern. The airframes would soldier
| >> > on,
| >> > albeit
| >> > with new parts etc, with no regard to the main issue, old airframes.
| >> > Another idea is that type certificate holders and type groups join
| >> > forces and create a "super annual" inspection. This would be done at
| >> > a
| >> > predetermined time, ether years of flight hours or both. It could
| >> > only
| >> > be done by an
| >> > approved (special training) facility. It may or may not be
| > reoccurring.
| >> > I have spoken to the new owner of Twin Commander, Jim Mathison.
| > There
| >> > will be a representative from Twin, there and we plan to meet.
| >> > This may be one of the most significant meetings with the FAA to
| >> > happen
| >> > in years, maybe ever. Input there will help guide the decision making
| >> > process for many years to come.
| >> > What are your thoughts?? Do you have any input you would like me
| >> > to
| >> > carry tot he floor from you?? jb
| >> >
| >> >
| >> >
| >> >
| >> >
| >> >
| >> >
| >> >
| >> >
| >> >
| >> >
| >> >
| >> >
| >> >
| >> >
| >> >
| >> >
| >> >
| >> >
| >> >
| >> >
| >> >
| >>
| >>
| >>
| >>
| >>
| >>
| >>
| >>
| >>
| >>
| >>
| >>
| >>
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Commander-List message posted by: BobsV35B@aol.com
Good Morning Gil,
I agree with the intent of your message, but I question your inclusion of
the Beech 18. I have heard of NO instances of catastrophic failure in a Twin
Beech airframe over the last decade.
Fact is, I know of no such failure in the history of the aircraft, though
there may well have been a few. The currently required spar strap was mandated
after inspections showed corrosion and few cracks.
I agree that inspections are needed and there are problems, but if you know
of specific Twin Beech difficulties, I would appreciate your letting me know
what they were.
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Air Park LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8503
In a message dated 3/13/2006 12:14:10 A.M. Central Standard Time,
YOURTCFG@aol.com writes:
I don't know of any studies. The FAA has so far been reactionary to this
growing concern. Several airframes have, over the last decade, ether
failed
catastrophically (Beech model 18, Beech T-34, Cessna 400 series and the
recent
Mallard) of been found to have serious defects. In some cases there were
extenuating circumstance (aerobatic trining?dodfighting) But in many
others,
simply fatigue and age appear to be the culprit.
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT |
--> Commander-List message posted by: "N395V" <N395V@direcway.com>
> I would like to know if a study has been done
Cessna did a government funded joint study on their 400 series Twins looking mainly
at wing spars. This was a result of 2 High time (20,000 hrs plus) wing spar
failures on 401/402s. Both were in air taxi service (heavy pax load, light
fuel lots of TO and LDGS) Both failures involved either a manufactuuring defect
or faulty structural repairs at the point of failure.
Twin Cessnas with tip tanks oddly enough suffer less spar fatigue with high fuel
loads and low pax loads (the condition most owner operators fly)
As a result the FAA ultimately issued an AD (approx $60,000) requiring a spar
strap kit at relatively conservative number of hours. The hours were based on
the Cessna study funded by the FAA. Cesna refuses to make the data public because
it contains "proprietary information" and apparently proprietary info is excluded
from discovery under the freedom of info act. My guess is that Cessna
would not be unhappy if the entire piston Twin Fleet was grounded.
The numbers of aircraft involved were so large that it was estimated it would take
6-8 years to manufacture all the kits and train enough shops to do the fix.
As such the FAA at a public meeting relented and came up with a schedule that
fixed 121 operators first and at lower times. Part 91 later at higher times.
Jim Bob.........
Talk to John Frank or Mike Busch at CPA Cessna Pilot's assoc. They spent a lot
of time with the FAA small airplane directorate on this and accomplished a lot.
I am certain both will be at the meeting. I would also imagine teaming up with
Dick Ward and the Twin Bonanza society might be a good idea.
John V.....
At one time I thought "Mr. RPM had a maint Facility in Costa Rica doing Twin Commander
wing spar caps at a bargain price (relatively speaking).
I think clearly the spar cap and engine mount trusses are going to be the issues
on the Twin Commanders. It saddened me to see my old 560 (SN#52) go on e bay
because of intragranular wing spar corrosion. (Corrosion in the web not the cap)
--------
Milt
N395V
F1 Rocket
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=21445#21445
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT |
--> Commander-List message posted by: "css nico" <nico@cybersuperstore.com>
Funny enough, I, too, have toyed with the lottery-winning-fool idea. It just
hasn't happened yet. And as soon as it does, if it does, one would probably
be swayed by the logic of the investment and not do it. Pity, though.
Nico
----- Original Message -----
From: "Barry Collman" <barry.collman@air-britain.co.uk>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 4:26 AM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
> --> Commander-List message posted by: "Barry Collman"
<barry.collman@air-britain.co.uk>
>
> Hi John,
>
> Nope, I'm sorry, but I don't have the parts count for a Commander.
>
> But, if you bring yours to the next Fly-In, we could strip it down and
find out!
>
> Maybe 'down-under' Richard has an 'ball-park' figure after his extensive
> restoration of a 680E?
>
> Best Regards,
> Barry
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "John Vormbaum" <john@vormbaum.com>
> To: <commander-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 7:44 AM
> Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
>
>
<john@vormbaum.com>
take
nicely on
piston
out,
great
have a
I
cost-effective
still be
at
new
The
to
the
*will*
and
or
perhaps
<john@vormbaum.com>
and
time
durability
to
like
document
500B's to
approved.
type
creative in
quit
aging
Rankin,
proposals
here
issue.
precipitated
surface.
under
in a
and
shall
it
soldier
airframes.
join
at
to
making
me
>
>
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT |
--> Commander-List message posted by: "steve2" <steve2@sover.net>
Ever since the CASA did a hatchet job on running lean of peak (by blaming a
Navajo accident on it) I've been suspicious of their conclusions. The
following links make interesting reading, but I don't take this fellow's
writings as the last word. From what I've read and learned, the way in which
an aircraft is flown and loaded (aerodynamically and weighted) over its life
has more to do with fatigue than the number of hours.
With that being said, it seems there were a couple of bad design decisions
in the spar. Be interested in if any of you folks have better insight.
http://www.casa.gov.au/airworth/papers/AeroCommander.pdf
http://www.casa.gov.au/airworth/papers/littleairliners.pdf
Steve
----- Original Message -----
From: <WINGFLYER1@aol.com>
Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2006 11:01 PM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
> --> Commander-List message posted by: WINGFLYER1@aol.com
>
> I would like to know if a study has been done on aircraft that were built
> during the fifties as far as in-flight break up or wing seperations
> measure up.
> And how long will the airframes/wings last under normal flying conditions.
> What is the projected life/safety of my 680. Gil Walker
>
>
>
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT |
--> Commander-List message posted by: "Barry Collman" <barry.collman@air-britain.co.uk>
Hi Steve,
That's an interesting document
(http://www.casa.gov.au/airworth/papers/AeroCommander.pdf).
It mentions on page 17, an accident to ZK-BWA. This was a Model 680, s/n
437-109.
I have a copy of the Accident Report (No. 25/3/1192). This showed a catalogue of
incidents which eventually gave rise to the wing failure:
"At some time after the aircraft was purchased by Bay of Plenty Airways it was
involved in an accident which resulted in complete fracture of the rear spar
lower cap and partial fracture of the rear spar upper cap of the starboard
wing."
(The aircraft did have a hard landing in the US while a Bay of Plenty Airways
pilot was familiarising himself with the aircraft. Structural repairs were
necessary before the aircraft could be flown again).
"For a considerable time before the last flight those defects permitted a
transference of load from the rear spar structure to the front spar structure
and a fatigue crack developed in the lower cap of the front spar".
"A number of incidents which occurred during the operation of the aircraft in
New Zealand had a cumulatively adverse effect on a structure weakened by the
spar cap defects referred to".
"The pilot flew across the summit of Mount Ruapehu at a height which contravened
regulation 38 of the Civil Aviation Regulations in respect of minimum safe
heights".
"In the summit area, turbulence, or some manoeuvre involving the pilot's
judgment, caused the starboard propeller, and possibly an adjacent portion of
the bottom of the fuselage, to strike a part of the mountain".
"Vibration induced by the damaged propeller coupled with turbulence of a violent
character caused the fatigue crack in the front spar lower cap to propoagate
very rapidly to complete failure, with consequent separation of the starboard
wing from the rest of the structure".
"The turbulence encountered by the aircraft on its last flight would no, by
itself, have caused separation of the wing from the rest of the of the
structure, despite the existence of the defects referred to. Nor would the
propeller strike in similar isolation".
"As a result of this investigation the structural integrity of the Aero
Commander 680S aircraft as a type is unquestioned".
I just thought I'd pass that detail on.
Best Regards,
Barry
----- Original Message -----
From: "steve2" <steve2@sover.net>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 3:16 PM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
| --> Commander-List message posted by: "steve2" <steve2@sover.net>
|
| Ever since the CASA did a hatchet job on running lean of peak (by blaming a
| Navajo accident on it) I've been suspicious of their conclusions. The
| following links make interesting reading, but I don't take this fellow's
| writings as the last word. From what I've read and learned, the way in which
| an aircraft is flown and loaded (aerodynamically and weighted) over its life
| has more to do with fatigue than the number of hours.
|
| With that being said, it seems there were a couple of bad design decisions
| in the spar. Be interested in if any of you folks have better insight.
|
| http://www.casa.gov.au/airworth/papers/AeroCommander.pdf
|
| http://www.casa.gov.au/airworth/papers/littleairliners.pdf
|
| Steve
|
|
| ----- Original Message -----
| From: <WINGFLYER1@aol.com>
| To: <commander-list@matronics.com>
| Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2006 11:01 PM
| Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
|
|
| > --> Commander-List message posted by: WINGFLYER1@aol.com
| >
| > I would like to know if a study has been done on aircraft that were built
| > during the fifties as far as in-flight break up or wing seperations
| > measure up.
| > And how long will the airframes/wings last under normal flying conditions.
| > What is the projected life/safety of my 680. Gil Walker
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Message 7
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT |
--> Commander-List message posted by: YOURTCFG@aol.com
In a message dated 3/12/2006 10:24:47 PM Pacific Standard Time,
nico@cybersuperstore.com writes:
If one owns the type certification and the
tooling,
Unfortunately, not all of the tooling exists. When the Commander line was
abandoned by Gulfstream, much of the tooling was simply left outside to rust.
Some had lead involved in tit's construction. There was an environmental
concern and the tooling was scraped. jb
Message 8
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT |
--> Commander-List message posted by: CloudCraft@aol.com
In a message dated 13-Mar-06 07:19:39 Pacific Standard Time, steve2@sover.net
writes:
http://www.casa.gov.au/airworth/papers/AeroCommander.pdf
http://www.casa.gov.au/airworth/papers/littleairliners.pdf
<><><><><><>
Steve,
Thank you for those links. They make for interesting reading -- and I'll
devote some time to that this week.
Capt. JimBob,
What ever the outcome, I want to thank you for making the journey to meet
with the FAA. I know what these meetings are like: they're not at all fun but
very necessary. (I've been on teleconferences with the Small Airplane
Directorate and that was bad enough.)
Taking your personal time to represent the fleet is above and beyond.
Wing Commander Gordon
Life is not simple anywhere. Probably less so elsewhere.
Message 9
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT |
--> Commander-List message posted by: CloudCraft@aol.com
In a message dated 13-Mar-06 08:06:17 Pacific Standard Time,
barry.collman@air-britain.co.uk writes:
"The pilot flew across the summit of Mount Ruapehu at a height which
contravened
regulation 38 of the Civil Aviation Regulations in respect of minimum safe
heights".... caused the starboard propeller, and possibly an adjacent portion
of
the bottom of the fuselage, to strike a part of the mountain".
Hey! That's a good idea! We need to get ourselves one of those laws!
Wing Commander Gordon
Life is not simple anywhere. Probably less so elsewhere.
Message 10
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT |
--> Commander-List message posted by: CloudCraft@aol.com
In a message dated 13-Mar-06 08:16:18 Pacific Standard Time, YOURTCFG@aol.com
writes:
Some had lead involved in tit's construction. There was an environmental
concern and the tooling was scraped.
<><><><><>
Some of those girls worked in Las Vegas. Most use silicone for tits
construction now.
Wing Commander Gordon
Life is not simple anywhere. Probably less so elsewhere.
Message 11
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT |
--> Commander-List message posted by: "steve2" <steve2@sover.net>
Lead hasn't been used for bodywork for some time now.
----- Original Message -----
From: <CloudCraft@aol.com>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 11:36 AM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
> --> Commander-List message posted by: CloudCraft@aol.com
>
> In a message dated 13-Mar-06 08:16:18 Pacific Standard Time,
> YOURTCFG@aol.com
> writes:
> Some had lead involved in tit's construction. There was an environmental
> concern and the tooling was scraped.
> <><><><><>
>
> Some of those girls worked in Las Vegas. Most use silicone for tits
> construction now.
>
> Wing Commander Gordon
>
> Life is not simple anywhere. Probably less so elsewhere.
>
>
>
Message 12
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT |
--> Commander-List message posted by: Chris Schuermann <cschuerm@cox.net>
YOURTCFG@aol.com wrote:
> What are your thoughts??
What a wonderful opportunity Jim!
I think Commanders are a little unique from an "Aging Aircraft"
perspective. It's fairly well proven that Commanders are so well built
that they don't suffer as much from fatigue as many other models. They
do have a few environmental weakness that are unique though. Many
Commanders have seen a lot of heavy use (because they are so good at it)
and also many spend most of their lives outside due to lack of large
enough hangars. They also have an unusual number of various alloy
extrusions throughout the airframe. Due to these items, I think that
corrosion is far more an issue than either age or hours. As we know,
corrosion in many aluminum alloys is greatly accelerated by stress -
especially in the presence of water. The nacelle trusses are a prime
example of the results of a hard alloy which is under significan stress
and often is exposed to an electrolyte. I can say that every bathtub
commander I've seen in the last 10 years has significant exfoliating
corrosion on the little extrusion where the sway brace attaches to the
spar cap on the outboard side of the nacelle.
For my two cents worth, I think that an inventory of extruded parts
which are both under stress AND are subject to exposure to water would
be an excellent starting point for your "super annual" concept. There
are several hidden parts which I believe should be uncovered and
inspected every decade or so. The vertical hangars behind the firewall
on the front of the spar - for example - have probably never been looked
at on most Commanders. They're a prime candidate for failure at some point.
This is a great opportunity to eliminate the possibility of an in-flight
failure of a Commander with the resulting knee-jerk reaction of the FAA.
cheers
Chris
Message 13
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT |
--> Commander-List message posted by: "John Vormbaum" <john@vormbaum.com>
> John V.....
>
> At one time I thought "Mr. RPM had a maint Facility in Costa Rica doing
> Twin Commander wing spar caps at a bargain price (relatively speaking).
>
>
Hi Milt,
I think there is still a "bargain spar cap replacement deal", but the
bargain is right around $60k. I'm really hoping that won't be necessary
until 35,000 hours or so.
Message 14
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT |
--> Commander-List message posted by: YOURTCFG@aol.com
In a message dated 3/13/2006 9:40:27 A.M. Pacific Standard Time,
cschuerm@cox.net writes:
I believe should be uncovered and
inspected every decade or so. The vertical hangars behind the firewall
on the front of the spar - for example - have probably never been looked
at on most Commanders.
Thanks Chris Another area is the flap/aileron/rudder and elevator hangars.
The aileron hangars have been problematic for some years, the rest need a
good look. I did an appraisal on an 840 Commander in Cartrgena Columbia. The
aileron hangars had corroded clear off and the ailerons were laying on the
ground right were they had fallen off!! jb
Message 15
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT |
--> Commander-List message posted by: "John Vormbaum" <john@vormbaum.com>
Yet more proof that regardless of how robust an aircraft is, some people
just shouldn't be pilots!!!
/John
----- Original Message -----
From: "Barry Collman" <barry.collman@air-britain.co.uk>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 8:01 AM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
> --> Commander-List message posted by: "Barry Collman"
> <barry.collman@air-britain.co.uk>
>
> Hi Steve,
>
> That's an interesting document
> (http://www.casa.gov.au/airworth/papers/AeroCommander.pdf).
>
> It mentions on page 17, an accident to ZK-BWA. This was a Model 680, s/n
> 437-109.
>
> I have a copy of the Accident Report (No. 25/3/1192). This showed a
> catalogue of
> incidents which eventually gave rise to the wing failure:
>
> "At some time after the aircraft was purchased by Bay of Plenty Airways it
> was
> involved in an accident which resulted in complete fracture of the rear
> spar
> lower cap and partial fracture of the rear spar upper cap of the starboard
> wing."
> (The aircraft did have a hard landing in the US while a Bay of Plenty
> Airways
> pilot was familiarising himself with the aircraft. Structural repairs were
> necessary before the aircraft could be flown again).
>
> "For a considerable time before the last flight those defects permitted a
> transference of load from the rear spar structure to the front spar
> structure
> and a fatigue crack developed in the lower cap of the front spar".
>
> "A number of incidents which occurred during the operation of the aircraft
> in
> New Zealand had a cumulatively adverse effect on a structure weakened by
> the
> spar cap defects referred to".
>
> "The pilot flew across the summit of Mount Ruapehu at a height which
> contravened
> regulation 38 of the Civil Aviation Regulations in respect of minimum safe
> heights".
>
> "In the summit area, turbulence, or some manoeuvre involving the pilot's
> judgment, caused the starboard propeller, and possibly an adjacent portion
> of
> the bottom of the fuselage, to strike a part of the mountain".
>
> "Vibration induced by the damaged propeller coupled with turbulence of a
> violent
> character caused the fatigue crack in the front spar lower cap to
> propoagate
> very rapidly to complete failure, with consequent separation of the
> starboard
> wing from the rest of the structure".
>
> "The turbulence encountered by the aircraft on its last flight would no,
> by
> itself, have caused separation of the wing from the rest of the of the
> structure, despite the existence of the defects referred to. Nor would the
> propeller strike in similar isolation".
>
> "As a result of this investigation the structural integrity of the Aero
> Commander 680S aircraft as a type is unquestioned".
>
> I just thought I'd pass that detail on.
>
> Best Regards,
> Barry
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "steve2" <steve2@sover.net>
> To: <commander-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 3:16 PM
> Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
>
>
> blaming a
> which
> life
> decisions
> built
> conditions.
>
>
>
Message 16
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT |
--> Commander-List message posted by: "John Vormbaum" <john@vormbaum.com>
I hate hearing that. As a certifiable Tool Nut, it breaks my heart to hear
about good tools being abused in that fashion.
/John
----- Original Message -----
From: <YOURTCFG@aol.com>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 8:15 AM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
> --> Commander-List message posted by: YOURTCFG@aol.com
>
>
> In a message dated 3/12/2006 10:24:47 PM Pacific Standard Time,
> nico@cybersuperstore.com writes:
>
> If one owns the type certification and the
> tooling,
>
>
> Unfortunately, not all of the tooling exists. When the Commander line
> was
> abandoned by Gulfstream, much of the tooling was simply left outside to
> rust.
> Some had lead involved in tit's construction. There was an environmental
> concern and the tooling was scraped. jb
>
>
>
Message 17
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT |
--> Commander-List message posted by: Chris Schuermann <cschuerm@cox.net>
YOURTCFG@aol.com wrote:
> Thanks Chris Another area is the flap/aileron/rudder and elevator hangars.
Wow - just fell right off? Sounds like that would have been a good
subject airplane for overall damage investigation.
Interesting that there's no AD on the flap hangars isn't it? Seems like
almost every other airplane has some form of "inspect for
cracks/damage/etc" in this area (my Aztec included). Just another one
of those alloy plate/extrusion areas with a high load and subject to water.
chris
Message 18
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT |
--> Commander-List message posted by: "John Vormbaum" <john@vormbaum.com>
I was just patting myself on the back for being mature enough to not
capitalize on that typo ;-).
/John
----- Original Message -----
From: <CloudCraft@aol.com>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 8:36 AM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
> --> Commander-List message posted by: CloudCraft@aol.com
>
> In a message dated 13-Mar-06 08:16:18 Pacific Standard Time,
> YOURTCFG@aol.com
> writes:
> Some had lead involved in tit's construction. There was an environmental
> concern and the tooling was scraped.
> <><><><><>
>
> Some of those girls worked in Las Vegas. Most use silicone for tits
> construction now.
>
> Wing Commander Gordon
>
> Life is not simple anywhere. Probably less so elsewhere.
>
>
>
Message 19
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT |
--> Commander-List message posted by: W J R HAMILTON <wjrhamilton@optusnet.com.au>
Folks,
Re. Richard's 680E, at least he has the luxury of an aircraft
corrosion proofed "to MilSpec" standards, the 680Es bought by the old
Australian Department of Civil Aviation were all corrosion proofed
during manufacture, and it shows. Lucky chap !! The contrast sits
right behind him, my 500A, " corrosion proofed" after manufacture, I
suspect well after.
My Commander experience says ( amongst other things) that every lap
joint is suspect ( as well as the other comments so far). I am also
having to replace a number of fluted skins on aileron/flaps and
horizontal stab/elevators.
In my opinion you have to be very careful about the Australian
approach to " hard" fatigue lives, "they got religion".
But having said that, there are some really serious problems with
C400 series, and various Beech, particularly Barons, all a
combination of a hard life, corrosion and cracking. An emerging story
is serious cracking in pressure cracking in a number of Kingairs,
several here are probably headed for the scrap heap. On one recent
402B, just about every fastener hole around the engine/undercarriage
mounts and spar structure had to be reworked, and there was much
replacing of various bits of the structure. The same aeroplane had
extensive corrosion for most of the length ( height) in the fin.
We are also seeing VERY serious corrosion in some strutted Cessna, if
I was to buy a C172/182, having seen what I have seen, I would factor
in stripping down both wings, it is the sandwich spar from the root
to just outboard of the fuel tank, and one aircraft that had to be
rebuilt was an ex-USAF version of the 172, that had spent most of its
life in the dry reaches of inland Texas.
An entirely subjective comment ( a personal opinion, no science
behind it) is that the bigger Pipers seem to throw up fewer
unexpected horror stories.
An interesting issue arises about inspection techniques, many of the
FAA " GA approved" inspection techniques are about a generation out
of date, compared to Boeing/Airbus "manufacturer's maintenance
manual" techniques, which causes us quite a few problems, as some
CASA individuals ( inspectors) are in the habit of demanding
compliance with FAA/SID in detail, including use of ultrasonic crack
detection that has been superseded by equipment that does not require
every fastener to be removed. Needless to say, the practitioners of
the black magic of ultrasonic and eddy current crack detection have
long since junked their superseded equipment.
Cheers,
Bill Hamilton
At 23:26 13/03/2006, you wrote:
>--> Commander-List message posted by: "Barry Collman"
><barry.collman@air-britain.co.uk>
>
>Hi John,
>
>Nope, I'm sorry, but I don't have the parts count for a Commander.
>
>But, if you bring yours to the next Fly-In, we could strip it down
>and find out!
>
>Maybe 'down-under' Richard has an 'ball-park' figure after his extensive
>restoration of a 680E?
>
>Best Regards,
>Barry
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "John Vormbaum" <john@vormbaum.com>
>To: <commander-list@matronics.com>
>Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 7:44 AM
>Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
>
>
>| --> Commander-List message posted by: "John Vormbaum" <john@vormbaum.com>
>|
>| Nico,
>|
>| Funny enough, at some point in the near future I'm going to Arizona to take
>| a look at a (certified, I think) 350hp turbodiesel that would hang nicely on
>| a Commander wing.
>|
>| There are a few things that make building a "new" Commander extremely
>| unlikely:
>|
>| 1) Twin Commander Corp. owns the tooling & type certificate for the piston
>| airplanes and has no interest in supporting them
>| 2) From what I've heard, the tooling/jigs for the pistons are very worn out,
>| and if new ones were to be built, any mfr. would have to re-tool....at great
>| cost.
>|
>| The real clincher is the parts count in Commanders (Sir Barry, do you have a
>| number?). Just the nacelle alone has an extraordinary number of parts if I
>| recall correctly. To build a new airplane in an even remotely cost-effective
>| method, the airplane would have to be re-engineered. You could probably
>| redesign the nacelles and the rest of the fuselage with far fewer parts,
>| maybe even mix in some composites, but the man-hours required would still be
>| a killer. I don't think there's a way you could build them and sell them at
>| a profit for under $1M, which is quite steep for a piston twin (see many new
>| 2005 Barons flying around? I bet they only built 20 of them last year). The
>| man-hours were such a problem, they even stopped flat-riveting the lower
>| fuselages on Shrikes to cut corners. It didn't help keep the line alive.
>|
>| Even if you could clean-sheet the design, preserving the original
>| aerodynamics & appearance, it would still take a HUGE amount of capital to
>| build something that wouldn't be too competitive in today's market. For the
>| price you'd have to sell them, you could probably step into a turbine
>| utility aircraft or even a VLJ.
>|
>| I personally have a fantasy that some lottery winning aviation fool *will*
>| resurrect the design, maybe even the turbines too, with a fair bit of
>| composite structure, wet wings instead of bladders, none of the AD's, and
>| all modern accoutrements, but I just don't see it happening.
>|
>| Cheers,
>|
>| /John
>|
>| ----- Original Message -----
>| From: "css nico" <nico@cybersuperstore.com>
>| To: <commander-list@matronics.com>
>| Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2006 10:21 PM
>| Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
>|
>|
>| > --> Commander-List message posted by: "css nico"
>| > <nico@cybersuperstore.com>
>| >
>| > Interesting comment, John. If one owns the type certification and the
>| > tooling, surely if cost is not a factor, one can build new Commanders, or
>| > am
>| > I missing something. I would opt for a new power plant, of course, perhaps
>| > something like a new generation diesel engine.
>| >
>| > Nico
>| >
>| >
>| > ----- Original Message -----
>| > From: "John Vormbaum" <john@vormbaum.com>
>| > To: <commander-list@matronics.com>
>| > Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2006 9:50 PM
>| > Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
>| >
>| >
>| >> --> Commander-List message posted by: "John Vormbaum" <john@vormbaum.com>
>| >>
>| >> Captain Jimbob,
>| >>
>| >> I would especially like to see the really high time airframes of the
>| >> Commander world championed, like John Towner's 23,000-hr.+ airframe and
>| >> my
>| >> own 18,000-hr. airframe. I think showing well maintained older, high time
>| >> airframes in excellent running condition as evidence of their durability
>| >> would go a long way towards setting reasonable standards were the FAA to
>| >> implement inspection timeframes.
>| >>
>| >> I would also like some methods of airframe life extension addressed, like
>| >> new spar caps etc. You might want to dig for the Australian CAA document
>| >> that, after research, recommended a lifespan for Aero Commander 500B's to
>| > be
>| >> 35,000 hours, at which time a spar cap replacement is mandated. The
>| > document
>| >> further states that after spar cap replacement, the airframe would be
>| >> good
>| >> for another 35,000 hours.
>| >>
>| >> We have the benefit of flying an airplane that is exceptionally well
>| >> built
>| >> and designed to be rugged far beyond the limits for which it is approved.
>| >> Since building new Commanders is out of the question (regardless of type
>| >> certificate ownership, tooling, and cost), we need to be very creative in
>| >> ensuring that these airplanes will fly for years to come.
>| >>
>| >> Good luck,
>| >>
>| >> /John
>| >>
>| >> PS: I need about 50 more years out of my airframe (if I decide to quit
>| >> flying at 87, that is).
>| >>
>| >>
>| >> ----- Original Message -----
>| >> From: <YOURTCFG@aol.com>
>| >> To: <commander-list@matronics.com>
>| >> Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2006 7:18 PM
>| >> Subject: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
>| >>
>| >>
>| >> > --> Commander-List message posted by: YOURTCFG@aol.com
>| >> >
>| >> > HI KIDS.
>| >> >
>| >> > Later this month I will be attending the FAA meeting on aging
>| >> > aircraft to be held in Kansas City. With me will be Mr. Gary Rankin,
>| > the
>| >> > pres. of
>| >> > the Navion Society. Many other type groups will be represented as
>| >> > well
>| >> > as
>| >> > type certificate holders. The FAA is seeking guidance for proposals
>| > that
>| >> > will
>| >> > effect the long term life of our airframes.
>| >> > I am told on good authority that the FAA has no hidden agenda here
>| > but
>| >> > is sincerely looking for help from the industry regarding this issue.
>| >> > The
>| >> > recent wing failure of the Chauks Airline Grumman Mallard precipitated
>| >> > this
>| >> > meeting.
>| >> > There are a few sugestions already making there way to the surface.
>| >> > One, sponsored by the EAA, would allow all aircraft certificate under
>| > the
>| >> > old
>| >> > CAR-3 standards to "opt out" of the normal category and be placed in a
>| >> > new
>| >> > category allowing for much more flexibility in the use of parts and
>| >> > modifications. Although I have not seen a hard draft of this
>| >> > proposal,
>| >> > it appears it
>| >> > would be similar to the Canadian "owner maintained" category, we shall
>| >> > see.
>| >> > While I don't see this as a bad proposal, and support the concept, it
>| >> > doesn't
>| >> > seem to address the FAAs real concern. The airframes would soldier
>| >> > on,
>| >> > albeit
>| >> > with new parts etc, with no regard to the main issue, old airframes.
>| >> > Another idea is that type certificate holders and type groups join
>| >> > forces and create a "super annual" inspection. This would be done at
>| >> > a
>| >> > predetermined time, ether years of flight hours or both. It could
>| >> > only
>| >> > be done by an
>| >> > approved (special training) facility. It may or may not be
>| > reoccurring.
>| >> > I have spoken to the new owner of Twin Commander, Jim Mathison.
>| > There
>| >> > will be a representative from Twin, there and we plan to meet.
>| >> > This may be one of the most significant meetings with the FAA to
>| >> > happen
>| >> > in years, maybe ever. Input there will help guide the decision making
>| >> > process for many years to come.
>| >> > What are your thoughts?? Do you have any input you would like me
>| >> > to
>| >> > carry tot he floor from you?? jb
>| >> >
>| >> >
>| >> >
>| >> >
>| >> >
>| >> >
>| >> >
>| >> >
>| >> >
>| >> >
>| >> >
>| >> >
>| >> >
>| >> >
>| >> >
>| >> >
>| >> >
>| >> >
>| >> >
>| >> >
>| >> >
>| >> >
>| >>
>| >>
>| >>
>| >>
>| >>
>| >>
>| >>
>| >>
>| >>
>| >>
>| >>
>| >>
>| >>
>| >
>| >
>| >
>| >
>| >
>| >
>| >
>| >
>| >
>| >
>| >
>| >
>| >
>| >
>| >
>| >
>| >
>| >
>| >
>| >
>| >
>| >
>|
>|
>|
>|
>|
>|
>|
>|
>|
>|
>|
>|
>|
>|
>|
>|
>
>
CONFIDENTIALITY & PRIVILEGE NOTICE
W.J.R.Hamilton,Glenalmond Group Companies,Fighter Flights Internet
Services and Warbirds.Net. & <wjrhamilton@optusnet.com.au>.
This message is intended for and should only be used by the
addressee. It is confidential and may contain legally privileged
information.If you are not the intended recipient any use
distribution,disclosure or copying of this message is strictly
prohibited.Confidentiality and legal privilege attached to this
communication are not waived or lost by reason of the mistaken
delivery to you.If you have received this message in error, please
notify us immediately to:
Australia 61 (0)408 876 526
Dolores capitis non fero. Eos do.
Message 20
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT |
--> Commander-List message posted by: "Barry Collman" <barry.collman@air-britain.co.uk>
Just JimBob keeping abreast of the situation.
Then, we're fortunate that he's so up-front about everything.
Seriously though, this once again emphasises the need for owners to join the
Flight Group. The more Members we have, the more the FAA are likely to take
notice of us.
It also emphasises, yet again, that we have a Leader who is truly looking after
your interests.
Once again, as WinG Commander Gordon said, we have to say a big "Thank You" to
Jim.
Best Regards,
Barry
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Vormbaum" <john@vormbaum.com>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 6:23 PM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
| --> Commander-List message posted by: "John Vormbaum" <john@vormbaum.com>
|
| I was just patting myself on the back for being mature enough to not
| capitalize on that typo ;-).
|
| /John
| ----- Original Message -----
| From: <CloudCraft@aol.com>
| To: <commander-list@matronics.com>
| Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 8:36 AM
| Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
|
|
| > --> Commander-List message posted by: CloudCraft@aol.com
| >
| > In a message dated 13-Mar-06 08:16:18 Pacific Standard Time,
| > YOURTCFG@aol.com
| > writes:
| > Some had lead involved in tit's construction. There was an environmental
| > concern and the tooling was scraped.
| > <><><><><>
| >
| > Some of those girls worked in Las Vegas. Most use silicone for tits
| > construction now.
| >
| > Wing Commander Gordon
| >
| > Life is not simple anywhere. Probably less so elsewhere.
Message 21
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT |
--> Commander-List message posted by: Chris Schuermann <cschuerm@cox.net>
W J R HAMILTON wrote:
> the 680Es bought by the old
> Australian Department of Civil Aviation were all corrosion proofed
> during manufacture
That's an interesting bit of trivia that I was unaware of. Thanks!
> We are also seeing VERY serious corrosion in some strutted Cessna
I've seen some pretty serious corrosion here in the midwest lately on
Cessnas as well. Cessna did virtually nothing for corrosion-proofing
except on the few birds set up for float ops. Amazing how much
corrosion I've seen inside the wings of Cessnas that have been hangared
in Oklahoma their entire lives. Just condensation will do it.
> the bigger Pipers seem to throw up fewer
> unexpected horror stories.
That's been my observation as well Bill. Piper did a pretty darn good
job of slathering zinc chromate all over in many of their models. I
havn't found any corossion at all in my '65 Aztruk even after a total
tear-down restoration. Pitty that everybody didn't do the same.
chris
Message 22
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT |
--> Commander-List message posted by: WINGFLYER1@aol.com
Just want you guys to know,as a new owner I appreciate learning about my 680
and other commanders as well. I appreciate the opportunity to read your
comments Again,many thanks.Gil Walker .
Message 23
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT |
--> Commander-List message posted by: "css nico" <nico@cybersuperstore.com>
Gil,
You're not scared stiff yet?
----- Original Message -----
From: <WINGFLYER1@aol.com>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 3:55 PM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
> --> Commander-List message posted by: WINGFLYER1@aol.com
>
> Just want you guys to know,as a new owner I appreciate learning about my
680
> and other commanders as well. I appreciate the opportunity to read your
> comments Again,many thanks.Gil Walker .
>
>
Message 24
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT |
--> Commander-List message posted by: YOURTCFG@aol.com
In a message dated 3/13/2006 1:27:36 PM Pacific Standard Time,
barry.collman@air-britain.co.uk writes:
Once again, as WinG Commander Gordon said, we have to say a big "Thank You"
to
Jim.
Thanks guys. jb
Message 25
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT |
--> Commander-List message posted by: "css nico" <nico@cybersuperstore.com>
I've stopped laughing now. Oh, the depth of the intellect in this group.
----- Original Message -----
From: <CloudCraft@aol.com>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 8:36 AM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
> --> Commander-List message posted by: CloudCraft@aol.com
>
> In a message dated 13-Mar-06 08:16:18 Pacific Standard Time,
YOURTCFG@aol.com
> writes:
> Some had lead involved in tit's construction. There was an environmental
> concern and the tooling was scraped.
> <><><><><>
>
> Some of those girls worked in Las Vegas. Most use silicone for tits
> construction now.
>
> Wing Commander Gordon
>
> Life is not simple anywhere. Probably less so elsewhere.
>
>
Message 26
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT |
--> Commander-List message posted by: "John Vormbaum" <john@vormbaum.com>
I hear you, Nico....but do you think that Principal Fatigue Engineers ever
have this much fun?
----- Original Message -----
From: "css nico" <nico@cybersuperstore.com>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 7:51 PM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
> --> Commander-List message posted by: "css nico"
> <nico@cybersuperstore.com>
>
> I've stopped laughing now. Oh, the depth of the intellect in this group.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <CloudCraft@aol.com>
> To: <commander-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 8:36 AM
> Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
>
>
>> --> Commander-List message posted by: CloudCraft@aol.com
>>
>> In a message dated 13-Mar-06 08:16:18 Pacific Standard Time,
> YOURTCFG@aol.com
>> writes:
>> Some had lead involved in tit's construction. There was an
>> environmental
>> concern and the tooling was scraped.
>> <><><><><>
>>
>> Some of those girls worked in Las Vegas. Most use silicone for tits
>> construction now.
>>
>> Wing Commander Gordon
>>
>> Life is not simple anywhere. Probably less so elsewhere.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
Message 27
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT |
--> Commander-List message posted by: "css nico" <nico@cybersuperstore.com>
You know, I've watched that typo for a while and didn't know what to do with
it. It took an expert to finish that job.
I don't think other flyers have this much. It's an honor to be among these
guys.
:-)
Nico
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Vormbaum" <john@vormbaum.com>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 8:48 PM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
> --> Commander-List message posted by: "John Vormbaum" <john@vormbaum.com>
>
> I hear you, Nico....but do you think that Principal Fatigue Engineers ever
> have this much fun?
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "css nico" <nico@cybersuperstore.com>
> To: <commander-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 7:51 PM
> Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
>
>
> > --> Commander-List message posted by: "css nico"
> > <nico@cybersuperstore.com>
> >
> > I've stopped laughing now. Oh, the depth of the intellect in this group.
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: <CloudCraft@aol.com>
> > To: <commander-list@matronics.com>
> > Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 8:36 AM
> > Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
> >
> >
> >> --> Commander-List message posted by: CloudCraft@aol.com
> >>
> >> In a message dated 13-Mar-06 08:16:18 Pacific Standard Time,
> > YOURTCFG@aol.com
> >> writes:
> >> Some had lead involved in tit's construction. There was an
> >> environmental
> >> concern and the tooling was scraped.
> >> <><><><><>
> >>
> >> Some of those girls worked in Las Vegas. Most use silicone for tits
> >> construction now.
> >>
> >> Wing Commander Gordon
> >>
> >> Life is not simple anywhere. Probably less so elsewhere.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
Message 28
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Commander-List message posted by: "Jim Addington" <jtaddington@charter.net>
If I am out of line with this I apologize ahead of time, but thought it
interesting.
-------Original Message-------
Subject: Fwd-Thunderstorm
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 22:44:13 -0600
> From: <> Subject: Baron Von Richthofen On Flying Through A
Thunderstorm
> For The
> Thrill Of It
>
>
> Before the battle of Verdun our activity was disturbed by frequent
> thunderstorms. Nothing is more disagreeable for flying men than to
have
> to fly through a thunder storm. During the Battle of the Somme, a
whole
> English Flying Squadron came down behind our lines and became our
> prisoners of war because they had all been surprised by a
thunderstorm.
>
> I had never yet made an attempt to get through thunder clouds,
however I
> could not suppress my desire to make the experiment. During one whole
> day, thunder was in the air. But in order to look after various
things,
> I had flown over to the nearby fortress of Metz.
>
> I had an adventure during my return journey.
>
> After visiting the aerodrome of Metz, I had intended to return to my
own
> quarters, when an approaching thunderstorm became noticeable. As it
> approached from the north, its clouds looked like a gigantic,
> pitch-black wall. Old, experienced pilots urged me not to fly.
> However, I had promised to return to my base. I should have
considered
> myself a coward if I had failed to come back because of a silly
thunder
> storm.
>
> But I decided to try.
>
> I was in the air when the rain began falling. I had to throw away my
> goggles, other- wise I should not have seen anything. The trouble was
> that I had to travel over the mountains of the Moselle where the
> thunderstorm was now raging. And as I rapidly approached the black
cloud
> which reached down to the earth, I said to myself that probably I
> should be lucky to get through it.
>
> As I flew at the lowest possible altitude, I was compelled
absolutely
> to leap over
> houses and trees with my machine. Very soon I no longer knew where I
> was. The gale seized my machine as if it were a piece of paper and
> drove it along. My heart sank within me. I could not land among the
> hills. I was compelled to go on.
>
> I was surrounded by an inky blackness. Beneath me the trees bent down
in
> the gale. Suddenly, I saw right in front of me a wooded hill. I could
> not avoid it. I was able to fly only in a straight line. My Albatross
> managed to take it. And now I had to take every obstacle that I
> encountered. My flight became a jumping competition. Purely and
simply.
> I had to jump over trees, villages, spires and steeples, for I had to
> keep within a few yards of the ground . . otherwise I should have
seen
> nothing at all.
>
> The lightning was playing around me. At that time I did not yet know
> that lightning cannot touch flying machines. I felt certain of my
death
> for it seemed to me inevitable that the gale would throw me at any
> moment into a village or a forest. Had the motor stopped working I
> should have been done for.
>
> Suddenly, I saw that on the horizon the darkness had become less
thick.
> The thunderstorm had passed, over there. If I were able to get that
> far, I would be saved. Concentrating all my energy I steered towards
the
> light. Suddenly I got out of the thundercloud. The rain was still
> falling in torrents, but still I felt - saved.
>
> In pouring rain I landed at my aerodrome. Everyone had been waiting
for
> me. Metz had reported my start and had told them that I had been
> swallowed up by a thunder cloud. Withstanding the dangers during my
> flight, I had experienced glorious moments - and I now realize that
it
> was all very beautiful.
>
> But I shall never again fly through a thunderstorm unless the
> Fatherland should demand I should do this.
>
> Source : Von Richthofen's Journal
>
> [ abridged ]
>
>
Message 29
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT |
--> Commander-List message posted by: "John Vormbaum" <john@vormbaum.com>
As much as I admire WCG, I have to give credit where it's due. Sir Barry, in
his typical British fashion, capitalized on that typo with exceptionally
droll doublespeak, nearly knocking me off my chair.
Sir Barry, you're the best!
/John
----- Original Message -----
From: "css nico" <nico@cybersuperstore.com>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 9:17 PM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
> --> Commander-List message posted by: "css nico"
> <nico@cybersuperstore.com>
>
> You know, I've watched that typo for a while and didn't know what to do
> with
> it. It took an expert to finish that job.
> I don't think other flyers have this much. It's an honor to be among these
> guys.
> :-)
> Nico
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "John Vormbaum" <john@vormbaum.com>
> To: <commander-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 8:48 PM
> Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
>
>
>> --> Commander-List message posted by: "John Vormbaum" <john@vormbaum.com>
>>
>> I hear you, Nico....but do you think that Principal Fatigue Engineers
>> ever
>> have this much fun?
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "css nico" <nico@cybersuperstore.com>
>> To: <commander-list@matronics.com>
>> Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 7:51 PM
>> Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
>>
>>
>> > --> Commander-List message posted by: "css nico"
>> > <nico@cybersuperstore.com>
>> >
>> > I've stopped laughing now. Oh, the depth of the intellect in this
>> > group.
>> >
>> > ----- Original Message -----
>> > From: <CloudCraft@aol.com>
>> > To: <commander-list@matronics.com>
>> > Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 8:36 AM
>> > Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
>> >
>> >
>> >> --> Commander-List message posted by: CloudCraft@aol.com
>> >>
>> >> In a message dated 13-Mar-06 08:16:18 Pacific Standard Time,
>> > YOURTCFG@aol.com
>> >> writes:
>> >> Some had lead involved in tit's construction. There was an
>> >> environmental
>> >> concern and the tooling was scraped.
>> >> <><><><><>
>> >>
>> >> Some of those girls worked in Las Vegas. Most use silicone for tits
>> >> construction now.
>> >>
>> >> Wing Commander Gordon
>> >>
>> >> Life is not simple anywhere. Probably less so elsewhere.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|